“Action against Kerala priest: Church awaits directions from Vatican”& related article

KOCHI:  Dismissing the anticipatory bail plea filed by Fr Edwin Figarez, a priest at the Puthenvelikkara Lourdes Matha Church who is accused of raping a minor girl, the Kerala High Court on Tuesday observed that it was unfortunate that abuse of children for satisfying the lust of monstrous persons is increasing.

Justice K Ramakrishnan also observed that such persons were not concerned about the future of the children. “The accused in the case is a priest who is supposed to instil moral values in others and prevent people from committing crimes,” it said.

The court further observed that even at the time of hearing the bail plea, there was no denial from the part of Edwin Figarez of having committed the sexual assault.

The allegation against Fr Figarez is that he raped a 14-year-old girl at the parsonage of the Church repeatedly, from January to March 2015.

Fr Figarez submitted that the offences were falsely foisted and were incorporated with the malafide intention of ruining his future. “The petitioner is a very famous priest of the Christian community, and is very well known for his retreat all over the world,” the petition stated. Fr Figarez alleged that his co-priests – Francis Thaniyadathu and Nixon Kattassery – who had been inimical towards him, cooked up the ‘false’ case.

“It was the co-priests who insisted the mother of the girl to file a case against Fr Figarez,  because they were envious of the wide acceptance of the petitioner as the Dhyana Guru. Their intention was to harm his reputation. These priests had earlier threatened the petitioner that his reputation would be tarnished,” the petition stated.

Director General of Prosecution T Asaf Ali submitted that the custody of the accused was required for conducting a proper investigation.

“If anticipatory bail is granted, it would adversely affect the case. The accused misused his position and allegedly raped the victim,” the prosecution submitted.

The court dismissed the arguments of the counsel for the priest that there was a delay in lodging the complaint. The court said the delay could not be a ground when the victim had narrated the whole incident before the investigation officer. “The acceptability of the victim’s statement could be considered only at the time of the trial,” the court observed.